Sunday, December 25, 2011

We remember Mary, a pregnant teen whose dreams of romance gave way to a shotgun wedding and local gossip.

We remember Joseph, a working-class laborer everyone thought had been duped.

We remember the journey, a forced migration by a ruling class seeking to increase their tax revenue

We remember Bethlehem, and parents making do in a tough situation: hotels booked solid, ‘no vacancy’ signs everywhere. But the baby’s coming, and there’s nothing to be done but to pull over at the nearest gas station.

We remember the manger, just a food bowl with old newspaper lining the sides to soften the surface.

We remember the shepherds, migrant field hands at minimum wage and working the night shift at a dirty job, who punched out early to go see a miracle.

We remember the Magi, the statesmen, ambassadors, and dignitaries who cancelled their meetings to travel and bear witness to the prophecy.

We remember the flight to Egypt, when undocumented emigrants fled the authorities across the border to start a new life together as a family.

We remember their return to Nazareth, the backwoods town where the Child would grow up.

We remember the Christ, the Savior, who began his life on this earth as an outcast, a worker, an immigrant, a nobody on the side of the road.

There is a comic song in Avenue Q titled "Everyone's a Little Bit Racist." In the psychological literature, there are numerous studies that suggest that this actually more true than you might realize (See post: What is Racism?). I don't mean racist in the burning crosses or Aryan brotherhood sense, but rather the fact that our brains often cut corners for the sake of efficiency.

Research in cognitive psychology shows that one of the reasons our brains are able to do things that computers can't is because they rely onheuristicsHeuristics are mental rules that allow us to make guesses using stereotypes and memories that most easily come to mind.

Most of the time we use these heuristics without realizing it, and they do produce a favorable result. However, unless we are conscious of the situations in which these heuristics break down, we can end up thinking and behaving in very racist ways despite the best of intentions (See post: Does Intent Matter?).

For a benign example of how we use heuristics on an everyday basis, close your eyes and try to imagine what a penny looks like in as much detail as possible. Now try and pick out the real penny from the image to the left. Think about how many pennies you've handled over the course of your lifetime- it should be a no brainer!

However, our memories are not like video-cameras, but more like zip files. You're brain only stores some features, such as the fact that it has Lincoln's head and a date on it, and fills in the rest as best it can.

A more troubling example is eyewitness testimony. I teach introductory psychology a large Midwestern university, and recently conducted a demonstration where I showed my class a video of a man stealing a bike in New York. Take a second to watch the first theft in the video below. Pretend you are a witness on the scene, and justice will rest on how accurately you are able to describe the perpetrator.

I had my classes fill out a brief survey after watching the video, and they described the bike thief as having the following characteristics:

Notice that several students reported the thief having hair, when in fact he is bald. Unless the students took special notice the fact that he was bald, when their brain re-created the memory their memory to be able to answer the survey, it filled in this minor detail with what it would expect to see on a white man in his twenties.

Similarly, there were several students who remembered the bike thief having tattoos when he did not. They probably don't know any bike thieves from first-hand experience, so as their brain was re-creating their memory during retrieval, they probably relied on images of criminals that they had gotten from the media, which are often portrayed as having elaborate tattoos.

Most disturbing of all, some of them actually remembered the crimes being perpetrated by a black man. It would be very easy to try and write off this switch by assuming that these students are particularly racist or prejudiced. Unfortunately, it is much more likely that this happened because their brain is cutting the exact same corners that our brains cut every day.

Consider how often African-Americans are portrayed as criminals on television. This is the information our brains will use to fill in these gaps and make split-second decisions unless we consciously take steps to avoid it.

This is why not being racist is not a one-time decision, but rather a discipline that requires conscious thought and effort. Someone may have the best intentions in the world, but they will think and behave in racist ways by default unless they are aware of their biases and take steps to correct them.

To make matters worse, research suggests that the more we have on our minds, the more we rely on these stereotypes in making decisions. Noorderweier and Stapel recently conducted a study which found that people having to do several tasks at once, such as memorizing numbers while reading vignettes, rely more on stereotypes when making judgments about people than those who had a lighter cognitive load. Think of how often you multi-task in our fast-paced world!

The moral of the story is that until we slow down, become aware of the ways in which our brains are naturally biased, and find ways to try and make up for them, there will continue to be a discrepancy between our commonly stated values of equality and the racial micro- and macro-aggressions that we commit on a daily basis.

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

In response to this week's post '#Occupy, you are not the 99%,' #OccupyColumbus's John Dorn (@j_dorn) shared his own thoughts. Find below our twitter-based discussion thus far, & contribute your own thoughts in comments (where he and I will also continue). And be sure to follow @BTSFblog!

@j_dorn: its been happening for decades because nobody has stood up. Now we're standing... stand with us.

@BTSFblog: Don't get me wrong, in general, I do like #Occupy. But know that MANY stood before you, but have been bludgeoned into exhaustion

The 99 Percent. The symbol, to me, is incredibly powerful. It suggests, for the first time in our history, unity en masse. The opportunity, finally, for us to work together, united, to further humanity. This idea gives me chills just considering it...

But it would appear I'm one of the few.

I've been, to my knowledge, a very vocal supporter of diversity within the Occupy movement. I've tried, time and time again, to identify the issues affecting all those who say they are oppressed, because, to me, that is exactly why we're out there. Why, then, time and time again, have I been told, effectively, "We stood, you didn't stand beside us before, so we won't stand beside you now because we've got more to lose."

Before you respond, please know, I understand the sentiment. I get it, I do. But, I'd like to ask, where does this animosity get us? How does a tit-for-tat withdrawing of support help to further our collective agendas of equality? Why is getting my head bashed in a couple million more times necessary to get equal support?

I often ask why the person I'm speaking with feels that way. Often cited is lack of support during various civil rights movements and oppression throughout history. I'd like to point out now that this country hasn't seen a proper political movement in 30-40 years. This is that opportunity for us to finally band together, and a banner to fly which represents us all. If historical support is being used to gauge whether you want to participate now, I would suggest a cursory glance from a different perspective.

This is a new world. This is *our* new world. Today. Right now. We are building it, together.

The ways of old are cast aside. People like me, raised on a farm in rural Ohio, are marching alongside gays, blacks, women, latin@s, and everyone else, demanding equality. We exist in a unique time. A time when the ways of the oppressors are becoming reprehensible to everyone, collectively. When persecution of *anyone*, regardless of race, gender, creed, nationality, religious views, sexual orientation, or any other qualifier is unacceptable.

The time for unity is now. The time to stop fighting each other, and work together, is upon us.

I challenge every person who reads this to rally for one simple cause: Equality. Real equality. Do not think about historical oppression, but look forward to equal opportunity. Do not look at me as an oppressor, for I have never, ever, oppressed any person. Look at me as a brother, a comrade, a friend, an equal. Look at me with the same love with which I look at you. This is our world now. Let's help each other reconstruct it without comparing ourselves, but instead rallying together for equality overall.

So yes, I am an occupier. We are #Occupy. We do represent the 99% - to the best of our ability. If we're doing something wrong, come give us a hand.

.. I think the reticence is less abt "you werent there, so we wont be either" & more abt "you werent there, so now we CANT".. .. It's not a vindictive response, it's often just the only option people have..

Fair enough. This doesn't explain the attitude though. If a group feels unrepresented then instead of complaining about it that group should come represent themselves. Or at least, instead of just complaining, explain what issues aren't being addressed so we can work toward fixing them. I've seen none of this.

.. it's a privilege 2 even be able 2 #occupy. Where are ur kids? Who is taking care of ur parents?..

I don't have children, my mom works 40-50 hours a week and goes to college full-time to finish her business degree she's been busting her ass for (and paying for out of pocket). My dad died in 2001, when I was 16.

.. How is the cold affecting ur untreated TB? Who is waiting in line for u at social services?..

I work 40+ hours a week and #occupy whenever I'm not there. There are no social services offered to me, at all (because I now exceed the income requirements, but there wasn't much before either), so even if I needed to and could stand in that line it'd do me no good. I don't have a college degree because there were no scholarships and only $1000 in grant money, and at the time that college was an option I was working full-time and going to high school trying to help my mom keep our house. It didn't work.

.. It's easier for those of us with privilege to say 'we are all the same'.. .. But it is privilege to 'not think of historical oppression' when one doesnt live with its modern consaquences (eg. racially)..

This is fair. I had a bit of a leg-up, because my dad put a broken computer in front of me when I was 6 years old. I learned that thing inside and out, and have been training for the field I now work in for about 20 years. Without this, I'm not sure where I'd be.

.. if Occupiers are truly willing to stand for those that cant, then perhaps trust will grow, bt it takes time 4 u 2 sound sincere.. .. the fear is that this is another of many times someone says 'Im for you,' wanting support, without really following through.. .. Don't b indignant that folks who've been marginalized & exploited 4 causes for decades dont readily trust u.. .. There are a lot of deep wounds that cannot be healed overnight (what relationship ever works like that?)..

This is the root of our problem though. The blame for societal issues is being placed squarely on the shoulders of the people who just happen to have maybe benefitted from that past oppression, even if they had nothing to do with it. I don't understand why I'm not to be trusted in the first place. If it's just because I'm a 20-something white dude, isn't that a bit fucked up?

.. I truly hope folks can take a leap of faith and join on. But I understand why they would rather not..

If people don't want to stand beside us that's fine. I understand why, to a degree. What irritates me is when I read articles indicating that the #Occupy movement doesn't represent them because it's just a bunch of middle-class white people, and then refuse to join us or even tell us what issues we're not addressing. To me it feels like once the issues we wish to address are addressed, then the economic inequality will be fixed. The rest, being social inequality, will only come through persistent, long-term activism. While I'm certainly willing to do this, and plan on it, it's much less effective without some help from the people I'm pledging my support to. I view this similar to refusing to vote because the process doesn't work. With 30% of the people in this country actually bothering to take the time to vote (assuming they're not gerrymandered into being unable, a different issue but one I want to address very soon), one can only assume that the system is not fundamentally flawed, it's simply not utilized. Until we try something and prove it broken, we cannot assume it doesn't work.

.. I don't know u. Maybe ur as enlightened as u claim. So no matter what happens w #Occupy... .. I assume I can count on seeing u serving in the blighted neighborhoods of Columbus well into the future. I look forward 2 it..

If I know what I can do, I'll be there. That's why 2 months ago I moved from my house I was renting and into a tent on the sidewalk, because I thought that was the appropriate course of action. To constantly hear I'm still missing the bar and being offered no suggestions on a proper course of action, though, is beginning to take its toll.

.. heh...that's all. Sorry for all the tweets. might have to go MIA again, but will remain in dialogue as am able

Thanks for taking the time to respond! I look forward to our dialog in the future :-)

Not sure best way 2 respond point by point 2 ur comments (http://j.mp/vZZoLy), bt will include first word of ur line fllwd w ':'

Fair:
I cant account for other pple’s rudeness—it isnt the right way but their attitude doesnt diminish the point itself, any more than previous lack of involvement changes ur points. Both remain valid, if poorly communicated. I have now told u what issue need to be addressed, so I am glad u can now work towards fixing it. Beyond general suggestions outlined here, Im happy 2 offer practical steps/advice addressing my specific thoughts.

I dont/I work:

Privilege gives u independent (parents/kids), which makes it infinitely easier to occupy. I get that uve had struggles. But at this point u r a lot better off than many folks. Uve worked really hard, but there are also many systemic reasons u got where u r while others didn’t.

Fair:

I think largely, u understand this, as demonstrated by ur next line. "I had a bit of a leg-up...Without this, I'm not sure where I'd be." & a recent headline I saw from your colleague “We Can B the Voice of Ppl Who Dont Have Time 2 b Down Here.’ So it is a great start for change and solidarity. But relationships aren’t healed yet.

Root:

As a 20-something white chick I know benefit frm many similar privileges, but do believe it is my responsibility to combat them, more so than those that don’t have such benefits. It may be you ‘had nothing to do with it’ but Ive yet to actually meet someone that hasn’t perpetuated their own privilege. U make it sound like it is an issue of the past, and yet it is a very modern phenomena. Racially, for example: white folks regularly benefit during hiring, promotion, pay rates etc. And chances are u enable it too through subconscious biases (http://tiny.cc/9gpf2) & microagressions (http://tiny.cc/e8r5a).

And as @BDTSpelman describes, it’s like a moving sidewalk: if you stand still, you are moving with it. Instead, one must actively walk against it to reverse the flow. It is easily self-perpetuating. All that is required to maintain it, is business as usual…[when] pple dont disrupt unfair systems of privilege, theyre—willingly or unwillingly—on the moving sidewalk receiving White privilege and inadvertently enabling racism” It IS in fact our responsibility to work against that in an active way, and our fault when we dont. It is a continuous process, of course. No one ever ‘arrives.'

It is similar principle as what we r asking corporations to do. They could go on as is w status quo, but we r putting responsibility on them to activate change. Of course, some companies could argue that they themselves didn’t cause these issues & shouldnt be blamed/have to change it. But they still benefit & I believe there is a moral imperative 4 them 2 use their power to change it. I can help, but ultimately those w power have to actively let go of it (whether or not they asked 4 it in 1st place). Likewise for our own set of privileges

If people:

valid points. I feel you.

If I:

If JPMorgan today announced all its business practices would be fair and it would act only 4 common good, Id be impressed, but still cautious. Id want 2 see the commitment. Maybe a better person would jump right in and offer precious time/resources to make it happen. But if corporate greed has put me behind 8ball, Im not going 2 b excited 2 make big scarifies 2 help them w ‘the common good.’ Maybe I should, but it takes time to build trust after a shift like that. Even if it’s a new CEO (uninvolved in 2008), that person is still a part of the culture/legacy. Start w service to gain trust, rather than expecting ppl will join b4 knowing u or ur heart. It takes a TON of time, but compare it to ur ~20 yrs, and the long periods of historic mistrust that came b4. Half a year is simply not enough.

I hear ur frustration. U have made drastic changes that are all in the right direction. On the whole, it is really great what u have done. I am sure u r well ahead of the curve. Of course we can all always do more. I understand if u r tired. Perhaps this service is plenty 4 u right now. But doesn’t change that there is more. If that is frustrating, better to ignore outside opinion all together.

#OccupyColumbus maintains a steady presence at the Ohio Statehouse, which happens to be in front of the main downtown bus lineup. Every time I visit the site, there is a telling division between the Occupiers and the folks waiting for the bus. They are two completely different demographics across class, race, age, and education.

It seems to me, the Occupiers are not the 99%. The 25%-66% maybe, but that's not as catchy. An entitled middle class has begun to feel the struggle that existed long before they got involved. Suddenly, they have lost some of their privilege, and 'the American Dream' game isn't so fun any more. I don't deny that there are major issues that these folks are rightfully bringing to light. But to claim a stance for the 99% while blogging from your iPhone seems disingenuous.

Many have also observed a lack of racial diversity within #Occupy that is deeper than census percentages (OccupyWallStreet.org reports that the movement is 81.2% White, 7.6% 'Other', 6.8% Hispanic, 2.8% Asian, and 1.6% Black). Suddenly the police brutality, unemployment, low income, government disenfranchisement, and high education costs have affected a large number of privileged white folk. But early in the movement, #Occupy failed to reach out to those that have historically been on the receiving end of such inequality. Elon James White notes that "the type of outrage that pops up now at what many of us have lived with on a regular basis for years feels insulting."

Nevertheless, #Occupy has been gaining traction with POC communities, especially as new movements spring up across the country. And the results have been compelling. But remember that all protesters are not treated equally. Given the history of racialized policebias and violence, the POCcupiers have a lot to risk when they protest, more so than do white Occupiers. We know that as bad as the media coverage of the movement is now, it would be a lot worse if the majority of the protesters were black.

Yet, even if folks that are typically marginalization in the USA were actively enfranchised with the #Occupy movement, our claim would still be limited. We still represent the 1% in the rest of the world's eyes. Let us be ever mindful of that privileged position.

Finally, a word of caution about claiming whose organizations Jesus would join in such debates. I do believe in a God that consistently champions the cause of the poor, and who has been known to protest an exploitative free-market. But I am always wary when we proclaim that 'God is on our side.' Of course, we should always strive to be on God's side, and that may mean standing for one principle over another. But co-opting His name for a cause is a dangerous business. And it comes awfully close to Judging for ourselves who is, and is not, a Christian.

Sunday, December 4, 2011

When Stella Harville recently returned from college to visit her hometown church, Gulnare Free Will Baptist (GFWB), she brought her future husband, Ticha Chikuni with her. Shortly thereafter, the congregation voted to prevent the couple from ever becoming members of the church. The resolution states thatinterracial couples"will not be received as members, nor will they be used in worship services or other church functions."

It's tempting to shake our heads and dismiss this situation as an extreme exception to Christian love. After all, only 15 people even participated in the vote out of a congregation of ~40 people. In total, it was nine people that voted to pass the resolution. Surely nine crazy folks can just be dismissed as terribly misguided...

But we have to remember that we are One Body, and we are responsible for the actions of our sisters and brothers in Christ. As representatives of Christ, if we claim His name, while allowing disenfranchisement of His children under that same name, we blasphemy the Good News.

Notice Harville's reaction to the resolution: "Whether they keep the vote or overturn it, it's going to be hard for me go back there." This is about more than the actions of nine people. This is about the image of Christ.

We know Americans aren't so good at distinguishing a religion from its extremists members. Alvin Sanders at Reconciliation 101 recognizes that "this is the type of thing that shames the whole Body of Christ, as many unbelievers lump us all together regardless of denominational affiliation." No matter how hard we try to distance ourselves from GFWB (as the pastor and national leadership of the church have tried to do), Christ and Christains are already inextricably caught up in it as far as the World is concerned.

So what if, rather than trying to distance ourselves, we instead took responsibility? What if we as Christ-followers owned up to the fact that we have done a poor job of acting for justice and reconciliation, and that as a result, the Church has once again been a source of pain for those seeking fellowship?

Where were we during the spiritual education of our siblings in Christ? How is it that our stance for justice is meek enough that this incident is even possible? How is it that GFWB's actions actually confirm unbelievers' suspicions, rather than serving as an exception to our undeniable steadfastness for others?

The truth is, GFWB simply put into writing what many other communities still believe in practice. We are all subject to the same set of prejudgments that converged to create this particular situation. The rest of us are not necessarily any more enlightened than GFWB, we are just more careful about which prejudices we hold, and how we express them. Ask any multiracial family searching for a church home, it doesn't take long to discern the true unwritten racial policy of a given congregation (see previous post: Interracial Relationships in the Church).

So rather than waving our hands and sucking our teeth, let's own the responsibility for our sisters and brothers in Christ. Let us take this incident as a reminder that there is much work yet to be done. Let us begin with a careful examination of our own prejudices and sticking points. Can you honestly say, 'all are welcome here?'

Who might have trouble gaining acceptance in your own church? How would a pregnant teen be welcomed? A youth in baggy jeans? Someone off the street?

If these folks make it though the lobby, what does your body language tell them about your hospitality?

What if Spanish were incorporated into your weekly worship? What about hip-hop, or a black gospel choir? What would your congregation's unspoken reaction be?